So the Athletic had an article that their writers put together. The idea was for the non-conference season to put together an NBA copy of the bubble.......there would be 8 team bubbles who would play a round robin schedule with the team in their bubble.....teams would be isolated in a hotel with health procedures similar to NBA....NU would be in Milwaukee with the following teams Bradley, Green Bay, Illinois State, Indiana State, Marquette, Milwaukee, Northwestern, Wisconsin .........while I dont think this will happen it may be what we see Conferences thinking about doing........????
Mini-Bubble Non-Conference
- Thread starter loyolacat
- Start date
These are supposed to be students, right?
The article was very well done. It's a fascinating idea. If anything, some of the organizers of those exempt tournaments should consider cooking up a larger tournament with pool play and then a winners' and losers' brackets to guarantee games. In many cases, attendance at these events is sparse, to be generous.
OOC tournaments aren't about attendance, they are purely for TV. ESPN will KILL for these games.
Agree, sorry if I was not clear. Especially if there is no football it would be something to fill a lot of programming time. Games could be scheduled on every day, back to back. It's a great idea.
1) I can understand a bubble concept for pro athletes. Not for the unpaid/underpaid/not-collectively-bargained college guys.
2) A friend and I were BS-ing ideas how there could be a college hoops season. The best we could come up with is that the conferences relinquish their membership for one season (I know. Not going to happen), and schools are only allowed to play within X miles of their campus. X would equal a 2-3 hour bus ride ... no planes. Maybe no hotels.
For instance, NU could probably have a 15-20 game schedule with that idea. OTOH, could Arizona, for instance? Or another geographically distant school?
3) I heard an awfully good argument yesterday that if the schools agreed to pay the athletes in the past, they could have had a season this year. So what would be the cost of paying players versus a lost season?
2) A friend and I were BS-ing ideas how there could be a college hoops season. The best we could come up with is that the conferences relinquish their membership for one season (I know. Not going to happen), and schools are only allowed to play within X miles of their campus. X would equal a 2-3 hour bus ride ... no planes. Maybe no hotels.
For instance, NU could probably have a 15-20 game schedule with that idea. OTOH, could Arizona, for instance? Or another geographically distant school?
3) I heard an awfully good argument yesterday that if the schools agreed to pay the athletes in the past, they could have had a season this year. So what would be the cost of paying players versus a lost season?
The cost of paying players in a season where there are no paying spectators in the stands? How much TV revenue would, say, the Big Sky conference rake in when compared to the Cartel conferences? There are a few hundred DI basketball schools. How many of them could expect to make a profit this season with the paying players above and beyond scholarships thing?
No, I don't buy it.
No, over the long term. Let's say you would have paid them for the past year or two and the rest of the years going forward
Each B10 school received $54M from the BTN in 2018. So let's be generous and say they will receive 40% of that this year (fat chance). After all, the network is still running with advertisers.
From a business standpoint, was it worth a minimum of $30M+/school not to pay them?
To be devils advocate to my own discussion, you'd probably have to incur the cost of other sports also.
How much did the Big Sky schools receive from the Big Sky Network?
Right. What's your answer to yourself?
It's a legitimate point. But that's a whole other discussion that is overdue by at least a decade. Let me know when it actually becomes something of substance.
The NCAA has proven again it has no interest in true governing, so I don't know why the Big Sky or the B10 and every other conference bothers with them anymore. I can see an argument for both the P5 and smaller conferences telling them to go f off.
Just to address your question about the Big Sky, the conference gets no TV money, each year generates only the minimum single share from the NCAA basketball tournament (because they never win), and averages about 1,500 or so fans a game. So no, they are not paying players anytime soon. The Big Sky is what college athletics was about 100 years ago, a little diversion for a few student athletes who get a scholarship in return. No cost of attendance, very little ( I won’t ever say NO) money under the table and a pleasant little four-year athletic experience.
Similar threads
